W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-gld-comments@w3.org > April 2013

Re: dataset and Dataset

From: Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>
Date: Sat, 06 Apr 2013 10:53:18 +0100
Message-ID: <515FF08E.2000103@w3.org>
To: RaphaŽl Troncy <raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr>
CC: Bill Roberts <bill@swirrl.com>, Makx Dekkers <makx@makxdekkers.com>, public-gld-comments@w3.org
True RaphaŽl. LC can be as short as 3 weeks (from the date of 
publication of the doc/announcement to relevant WGs etc.)

On 06/04/2013 10:28, RaphaŽl Troncy wrote:
> Dear all,
>
>> "Ideally, after a Last Call announcement, a Working Group receives only
>> indications of support for the document, with no proposals for
>> substantive change. In practice, Last Call announcements generate
>> comments that sometimes result in substantive changes to a document. A
>> Working Group SHOULD NOT assume that it has finished its work by virtue
>> of issuing a Last Call announcement."
>>
>> In other words, if LC comments lead to changes that would cause an
>> existing implementation to break, you need to do another LC cycle.
>
> Yes, but the 2nd LC period can be short (this is what we did in previous
> WG I have participated or chaired such as the Media Fragments WG). From
> my point of view, this is still better to do the change now, than
> waiting for CR where someone will object and go back to LC.
> I'm in favor of Phil's option 1., delete dcat:xxx and replace it with
> dcat:hasXxx.
> Best regards.
>
>    RaphaŽl
>

-- 


Phil Archer
W3C eGovernment
http://www.w3.org/egov/

http://philarcher.org
+44 (0)7887 767755
@philarcher1
Received on Saturday, 6 April 2013 09:53:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 10 October 2018 10:43:22 UTC